XUL thoughts: 
http://linuxintegrators.com/blog/acoliver/code/?permalink=0131.html

> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Reply-To: "Research Triangle Java User's Group mailing
> list."<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 10:10:55 -0400
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [Juglist] JBoss and Web Client
> 
> Given that I sponsored Tapestry into the ASF and I work for JBoss, do you
> really have to ask?   ;-)
> 
> Marc is talking about more "Richer Client" and I think I'll be talking to
> him about XUL which is awesome BTW.  Microsoft is even planning to fork XUL
> with their own dialect.
> 
> While I don't speak for Marc, I think I got what he was saying:
> The idea at JBoss is to "reduce the number of remote calls for performance"
> this is "duh" to anyone worth their salt, yet the browser->Appserver combo
> actually maximizes the number of remote calls.
> 
> So basically the standard web app.  I go to a page, I enter some data, I hit
> submit...  Wait.... Slow..... Zzzzz....
> 
> Compare to the old days.  VB might be loading stuff in the background had M$
> gotten the threading model right (apartment threading..bah).  The user
> wasn't necessarily exposed to the request/response (command pattern) model
> of the web.  In short HTML/HTTP is a drag.
> 
> Tapestry is AWESOME for HTML/HTTP.  It removes a great deal of the suck, but
> it is still a kludge around the HTML/HTTP model.  We need to move the
> non-critical session back where it belongs, on the client.
> 
> History of Computing (abridged):
> 
> Lets do everything on big mainframes (thin client)
> Oh no, lets do everything on the client (fat client)
> Oh no, lets do everything on web servers (thin client - HTML was VT100 for
> the 90s)
> predictive: Oh crap, that sucks too...maybe we should put some of that back
> on the client (fatter than thin client) but still do the business logic on
> the server.
> 
> All that said, we DID make progress.  Fat client was an improvement over the
> mainframe (no offense Greg) and far cheaper (go CP/M->OS/2->Windows!).  The
> web did allow richer thin clients than originally (HTML looks much nicer
> than ANSI art and VT100) and had better tech surrounding it.  That being
> said, it has many of the disadvantages of mainframe computing (spikes,
> centralization of processing, etc).  Now we need a better compromise between
> what we had with VB/Powerbuilder/etc and what we have with the web.
> 
> Is your session really something that belongs on the server?  Is it business
> logic?  Is it OUR data or YOUR data..  Its time to rethink web-computing.
> 
> I don't think Tapestry has to die under this model, but evolve to use more
> than HTML.  JSF has a minor advantage in this area, but at what cost?  With
> EJB3 simplifying and removing XML configuration/meta data do I really want
> to maximize it on the front end?  In the age of Eclipse and the post-boom do
> I really want to go back to 3-5k per seat tools above massive abstractions
> that leak?  Its time to standardize on simplistic programming models, not
> build large cathedrals on complex ones.  The foundation of JSF is shaky, EJB
> 1-2.x proved that.  The idea might be nice but the implementation...well go
> look at that and tell me if you really want to meta-code that way.
> 
> -Andy
> 
>> From: "David Moran" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Reply-To: "Research Triangle Java User's Group mailing
>> list."<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 08:39:44 -0400
>> To: "Research Triangle Java User's Group mailing list." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Subject: [Juglist] JBoss and Web Client
>> 
>> What was the web client that Marc Fleury said the other night that JBoss was
>> looking to work with and does anyone know if they considered Tapestry?
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Juglist mailing list
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> http://trijug.org/mailman/listinfo/juglist_trijug.org
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Juglist mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://trijug.org/mailman/listinfo/juglist_trijug.org


_______________________________________________
Juglist mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://trijug.org/mailman/listinfo/juglist_trijug.org

Reply via email to